This type of concepts were pretty hot, but has any one of them entered production? The electric drive is novel though. I don't think the Swedish Army is going to embark on this project in the short-term. They have plenty of modern eqpt and are facing drastic cuts in budgets and changing force structure in the coming years. If armoured vehicles are going to look like this in the future, my enthusiasm may be cooled down a bit. ;) http://www.alvishagglunds.se/Images/high/TD2.jpg ALT=StealtTD>

They have finally given up trying to make the M113 something it isn't - and IFV. Seen in perspective it seems to be the carrier the heavy infantry needs. TAC: Don't be too disappointed about the number. It fits the number of Leo2 which is it tank companion. It seems like they still follow my recommandations 10 years back. A pro-brigade with a btn of heavy, medium and light each - and they follow more or less the norm of the USArmy of 40-50 vehickles per btn to achieve the combat endurance of the unit - inthe old days a tank company had 10 tanks - which was excellent - if you you faced the red army and was going to get wiped out the first day anyway. This new structure will allow the personel to be trained on a sufficiently high level to expand severalfold in the needed arms category if need arises.

They have finally given up trying to make the M113 something it isn't - and IFV. Seen in perspective it seems to be the carrier the heavy infantry needs. Totally agree. That was a very ill conceived idea. And the indegenous integration of kit from disparate suppliers turned out to be a total failure on top of that!

HMAK has always been the happy huntingground for demented engineers that had flunked thetest for the severely mentally impared. Tårnfalken is another example. If they could limit themselves to supervising the translation of foreign manuals!!

Thought the Tårnfalken UAV was an Air Force ownership/Army implementation and operational use thingie with a screwed up contract with the supplier - courtesy the AF Material Command. Oh, looks as we will sell the airframes and/or project to the Swedes or most possibly the Canucks. (Then they can go have a look at Hans Island, hehe) The Canucks are most happy with it in Afghanistan, despite losing one!

The Canucks are most happy with it in Afghanistan, despite losing one! They already have a similar system.

I never really understood why they could not make it work. But I know that programme management in the Army/AirForce is a constant disaster. The only programme i know of that did not get into serious trouble was the GV95 procurement. i think the decisions was made on the recommandations of a handfull of old sergeants that got a number of competing rifles and lots and lots of ammo. They ended up with choosing the one they could not destroy and could keep privates from destroying.